{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:106-f-4th-609","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:106-f-4th-609)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-14","fingerprint":"ewai:us:88b5b2","proof":"sha256:357f1928de211af477ffec178629b93bdc6bee0994424487a27df14d747b9206","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:106-f-4th-609","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"In the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"United States Court of Appeals","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"For the Seventh Circuit","paragraphs":["para_4"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_6","para_7","para_8"]},{"title":"SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INCORPORATED and SAM-","paragraphs":["para_10","para_11","para_12"]},{"title":"Appeal from the United States District Court for the","paragraphs":["para_14","para_15","para_16"]},{"title":"ARGUED FEBRUARY 15, 2024 — DECIDED JULY 1, 2024","paragraphs":["para_18","para_19","para_20"]},{"title":"KIRSCH, Circuit Judge. Paula Wallrich and several thousand","paragraphs":["para_22"]},{"title":"Arbitration Association alleging that Samsung Electronics","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., through","paragraphs":["para_25","para_26"]},{"title":"2 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33"]},{"title":"U.S.C. § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act. The court ordered","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Samsung to arbitrate and to pay the associated AAA filing","paragraphs":["para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44"]},{"title":"I","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Appellants, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and its subsidi-","paragraphs":["para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 3","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Association (AAA) Commercial Arbitration Rules” and that","paragraphs":["para_61","para_62","para_63"]},{"title":"Under the AAA rules, the AAA “has the discretion to ap-","paragraphs":["para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70"]},{"title":"Despite this initial fee requirement, the AAA Supplemen-","paragraphs":["para_72","para_73"]},{"title":"MC-10(d) states, “If administrative fees, arbitrator compensa-","paragraphs":["para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87"]},{"title":"Enter Appellees, a group of 35,651 Illinois consumers, who","paragraphs":["para_89","para_90"]},{"title":"4 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_92","para_93"]},{"title":"ILCS 14/1 et seq. Skeptical of the consumers’ litigation tactics","paragraphs":["para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101"]},{"title":"AAA requested $4,125,000 from Samsung, representing Sam-","paragraphs":["para_103","para_104"]},{"title":"Samsung, still doubting the merits of the claims, refused","paragraphs":["para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117"]},{"title":"Rather than submit their cases to federal court on the mer-","paragraphs":["para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 5","paragraphs":["para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134"]},{"title":"II","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Before turning to the merits of the appeal, we must ad-","paragraphs":["para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145"]},{"title":"(1) arises out of a commercial relationship (2) that is not en-","paragraphs":["para_147"]},{"title":"Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 59 n.9 (2009) (citing Chap-","paragraphs":["para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154"]},{"title":"6 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Therefore, under § 203 of the FAA, the district court had sub-","paragraphs":["para_157","para_158"]},{"title":"We next turn to appellate jurisdiction. The consumers","paragraphs":["para_160"]},{"title":"Samsung’s appeal. We disagree. The consumers proceeded in","paragraphs":["para_162","para_163","para_164"]},{"title":"U.S.C. § 4. The district court granted the petition and ordered","paragraphs":["para_166"]},{"title":"Section 16 of the FAA, 9 U.S.C. § 16, governs appellate review","paragraphs":["para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176"]},{"title":"Samsung to arbitrate. In further support, they chiefly rely on","paragraphs":["para_178"]},{"title":"Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph, 531 U.S. 79 (2000). The","paragraphs":["para_180","para_181"]},{"title":"Section 16(b)(1) only limits appellate review of an “inter-","paragraphs":["para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 7","paragraphs":["para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197"]},{"title":"740 F.3d 411, 413–15 (7th Cir. 2014) (seeking a stay under § 3","paragraphs":["para_199"]},{"title":"Thus, in a § 3 setting, a district court will have substantive","paragraphs":["para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213"]},{"title":"The Supreme Court’s reasoning in Green Tree tracks with","paragraphs":["para_215","para_216","para_217"]},{"title":"Opportunity Act (ECOA) based on a finance agreement","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"8 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225"]},{"title":"The Supreme Court concluded that it had appellate jurisdic-","paragraphs":["para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231"]},{"title":"86 (defining a “final decision” in § 16(a)(3) as “a decision that","paragraphs":["para_233","para_234","para_235"]},{"title":"In a footnote, however, the Court observed, “Had the Dis-","paragraphs":["para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249"]},{"title":"Court’s footnote in Green Tree merely confirms our discussion","paragraphs":["para_251"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 9","paragraphs":["para_253"]},{"title":"Green Tree did not involve a § 4 proceeding, and nothing in","paragraphs":["para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258"]},{"title":"Our sister circuits have reached this same conclusion. For","paragraphs":["para_260","para_261"]},{"title":"Union v. Wise Alloys, LLC, 807 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2015), a dis-","paragraphs":["para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273"]},{"title":"70; see also Int’l All. of Theatrical Stage Emp. & Moving Picture","paragraphs":["para_275"]},{"title":"801 F.3d 1033, 1040 (9th Cir. 2015) (“When the only matter be-","paragraphs":["para_277","para_278","para_279"]},{"title":"Brown v. Pac. Life Ins. Co., 462 F.3d 384, 391–93 (5th Cir. 2006)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(rejecting the appellees’ argument that a stay in the case ren-","paragraphs":["para_282","para_283"]},{"title":"10 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Our precedent likewise only reaffirms our appellate juris-","paragraphs":["para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303"]},{"title":"Ins. Co. of N.A., 547 F.3d 835, 836–37 (7th Cir. 2008) (finding","paragraphs":["para_305","para_306","para_307"]},{"title":"Finally, the consumers believe that the Supreme Court’s","paragraphs":["para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313"]},{"title":"Green Tree. See 531 U.S. at 87 n.2 (“The question whether the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"District Court should have [stayed rather than dismissed the","paragraphs":["para_316"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 11","paragraphs":["para_318","para_319"]},{"title":"Because the consumers proceeded in the district court un-","paragraphs":["para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330"]},{"title":"531 U.S. at 86. It therefore issued an appealable final decision","paragraphs":["para_332"]},{"title":"III","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"We next turn to the merits. A party seeking to compel ar-","paragraphs":["para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339"]},{"title":"First, it argues that the consumers failed to present evidence","paragraphs":["para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348"]},{"title":"12 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"A","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"While the FAA does not provide the evidentiary standard","paragraphs":["para_352"]},{"title":"(as well as our sister circuits) have analogized the standard","paragraphs":["para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358"]},{"title":"2002); Bazemore v. Jefferson Cap. Sys., LLC, 827 F.3d 1325, 1333","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(11th Cir. 2016); Bensadoun v. Jobe-Riat, 316 F.3d 171, 175 (2d","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Cir. 2003). The party seeking to compel arbitration bears the","paragraphs":["para_362"]},{"title":"See A.D., 889 F.3d at 1063 (“However, as the party seeking to","paragraphs":["para_364","para_365","para_366"]},{"title":"Litig., 19 F.4th 873, 881 (6th Cir. 2021) (“To determine whether","paragraphs":["para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 13","paragraphs":["para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386"]},{"title":"(1) copies of their arbitration demands made before the AAA;","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(2) a spreadsheet containing their names and addresses;","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(3) copies of Samsung’s terms and conditions; and (4) the","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"AAA’s determination that the consumers had met the AAA","paragraphs":["para_391"]},{"title":"First, the arbitration demands are nothing more than alle-","paragraphs":["para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402"]},{"title":"The copies of Samsung’s terms and conditions and the","paragraphs":["para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411"]},{"title":"And a spreadsheet of only names and addresses likewise fails","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"14 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_414"]},{"title":"Identifying a generic arbitration agreement and then inde-","paragraphs":["para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420"]},{"title":"A.D., 885 F.3d at 1062–63 (acknowledging undisputed arbitra-","paragraphs":["para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425"]},{"title":"Finally, the AAA’s determination that the consumers had","paragraphs":["para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439"]},{"title":"F.3d 1043, 1048, 1050–51 (7th Cir. 2020) (reversing a district","paragraphs":["para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 15","paragraphs":["para_446","para_447"]},{"title":"The consumers could have submitted almost anything to","paragraphs":["para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457"]},{"title":"The consumers alternatively argue that we should remand","paragraphs":["para_459","para_460","para_461"]},{"title":"USA Inc., 3 F.4th 927, 938 (7th Cir. 2021) (“Summary judgment","paragraphs":["para_463"]},{"title":"(quotation omitted); see also Bazemore, 827 F.3d at 1333 (“[De-","paragraphs":["para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468","para_469","para_470","para_471"]},{"title":"B","paragraphs":["para_473","para_474","para_475"]},{"title":"16 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_477","para_478","para_479"]},{"title":"States district court … for an order directing that such arbitra-","paragraphs":["para_481"]},{"title":"9 U.S.C. § 4. Here, Samsung and the consumers proceeded","paragraphs":["para_483","para_484"]},{"title":"The Supreme Court “has consistently held that parties","paragraphs":["para_486","para_487","para_488"]},{"title":"Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. 63, 69 (2019). Thus, “if a valid agreement","paragraphs":["para_490","para_491"]},{"title":"Id.; see also Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U.S. 176, 184 (2019)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(“Parties may generally shape such agreements to their liking","paragraphs":["para_494","para_495","para_496","para_497","para_498","para_499","para_500"]},{"title":"The arbitration agreement allegedly entered into between","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Samsung and the consumers delegated threshold arbitration","paragraphs":["para_503"]},{"title":"AAA’s discretion over the payment of administrative filing","paragraphs":["para_505","para_506","para_507"]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 17","paragraphs":["para_509","para_510","para_511","para_512","para_513"]},{"title":"Instead, it terminated the proceedings, opening the door for","paragraphs":["para_515","para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521","para_522","para_523","para_524"]},{"title":"Other circuits agree with our position. In Dealer Computer","paragraphs":["para_526"]},{"title":"2009), for example, Dealer Services and Old Colony agreed to","paragraphs":["para_528","para_529","para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535","para_536","para_537","para_538"]},{"title":"18 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":["para_540"]},{"title":"363 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2004), the parties agreed to resolve their","paragraphs":["para_542","para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549"]},{"title":"1012. Rather, the court noted the substantial discretion given","paragraphs":["para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556","para_557","para_558","para_559"]},{"title":"The consumers note that Dealer Computer Services and","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Lifescan involved parties who did not have the means to pay","paragraphs":["para_562","para_563","para_564","para_565","para_566","para_567"]},{"title":"FAA without force. No doubt, some courts have pondered","paragraphs":["para_569"]},{"title":"See, e.g., Tillman v. Tillman, 825 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir. 2016)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(“Our decision that Tillman’s case may proceed does not","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"No. 23-2842 19","paragraphs":["para_573","para_574","para_575","para_576"]},{"title":"(emphasis in original). But we see no reason to make that dis-","paragraphs":["para_578"]},{"title":"The Federal Arbitration Act does not grant the consumers","paragraphs":["para_580","para_581","para_582","para_583","para_584","para_585","para_586","para_587","para_588"]},{"title":"Glob. Inv. Mgmt., LLC, 31 F.4th 333, 336 (5th Cir. 2022) (“Here","paragraphs":["para_590","para_591","para_592","para_593","para_594","para_595","para_596","para_597","para_598","para_599","para_600"]},{"title":"Inc. v. Cahill, 786 F.3d 1287, 1294 (10th Cir. 2015) (concluding","paragraphs":["para_602","para_603","para_604"]},{"title":"20 No. 23-2842","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"In sum, even assuming an arbitration agreement between","paragraphs":["para_607"]},{"title":"Samsung to pay the AAA’s administrative fees. The parties","paragraphs":["para_609","para_610","para_611","para_612","para_613","para_614","para_615","para_616","para_617","para_618","para_619","para_620","para_621","para_622","para_623","para_624"]},{"title":"REVERSED","paragraphs":[]}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"In the","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"United States Court of Appeals","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"For the Seventh Circuit","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"PAULA WALLRICH, et al.,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"Plaintiffs-Appellees,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INCORPORATED and SAM-","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"SUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY, LIMITED,","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"Defendants-Appellants.","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Appeal from the United States District Court for the","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"No. 1:22-cv-05506 — Harry D. Leinenweber, Judge.","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"ARGUED FEBRUARY 15, 2024 — DECIDED JULY 1, 2024","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"Before SYKES, Chief Judge, and EASTERBROOK and KIRSCH,","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"Circuit Judges.","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"KIRSCH, Circuit Judge. Paula Wallrich and several thousand","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"other consumers filed arbitration claims before the American","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Arbitration Association alleging that Samsung Electronics","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., through","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"their electronic devices, unlawfully collect and store sensitive","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"biometric data in violation of Illinois law. Samsung denied the","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"2 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"allegations. Further, it refused to pay the administrative filing","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"fees required by the AAA. The AAA, in its discretion and in","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"line with its rules, terminated the arbitration proceedings,","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"opening the door for the parties to pursue their claims in","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"federal court. Rather than take that approach, the consumers","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"filed a petition to compel arbitration in district court under 9","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"U.S.C. § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act. The court ordered","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"Samsung to arbitrate and to pay the associated AAA filing","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"fees. Samsung appealed, disputing the existence of an","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"arbitration agreement with the consumers and challenging","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"the district court’s authority to require it to pay the AAA’s","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"fees. Because the consumers failed to meet their evidentiary","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"burden in proving the existence of an arbitration agreement","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"with Samsung, and because the parties’ alleged agreement","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"incorporated the AAA’s rules and procedures, which granted","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"the AAA substantial discretion over resolving fee disputes,","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"we reverse.","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"I","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"Appellants, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and its subsidi-","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"ary, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., design, manufacture,","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"and sell electronic devices, including smartphones and tab-","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"lets. When consumers purchase or use Samsung devices, they","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"automatically agree to Samsung’s terms and conditions, ei-","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"ther by opening the original product packaging or by creating","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"a Samsung user account to be used with the device. Under","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"those terms, the consumer agrees that “all disputes” between","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"the consumer and Samsung arising in any way from the sale,","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"condition, or performance of the device “shall be resolved ex-","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"clusively through final and binding arbitration, and not by a","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"court or jury.” Further, the terms specify that the arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"“shall be conducted according to the American Arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 3","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"Association (AAA) Commercial Arbitration Rules” and that","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"administrative, facility, and arbitrator fees shall likewise “be","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"determined according to AAA rules” when, as here, the dam-","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"age claims exceed $5,000.","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"Under the AAA rules, the AAA “has the discretion to ap-","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"ply or not to apply” any of its rules, including rules that cover","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"administrative fees. These rules outline the initial filing fee re-","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"quirements imposed on parties when 25 or more similar","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"claims for arbitration are filed. In such cases, both the individ-","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"ual consumers and the business entity have initial filing fees","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"due to the AAA before the arbitration can continue.","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"Despite this initial fee requirement, the AAA Supplemen-","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"tary Rules for Multiple Case Filings contemplate the scenario","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"where one party refuses to pay its share of the filing fees. Rule","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"MC-10(d) states, “If administrative fees, arbitrator compensa-","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"tion, and/or expenses have not been paid in full, the AAA may","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"notify the parties in order that one party may advance the re-","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"quired payment within the time specified by the AAA.” In","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"other words, if a business entity like Samsung refuses to pay","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"the fees, the AAA will notify the consumers of the business’s","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"nonpayment, and if the consumers still wish to proceed, they","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"can advance the business’s fees. On the other hand, according","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"to rule MC-10(e), if the consumers choose not to advance the","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"fees, “the AAA may suspend or terminate [the] proceedings”","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"and “may also decline to administer future arbitrations with","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"the parties involved.” At that point, the rules specify that ei-","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"ther party may choose to submit its dispute to the appropriate","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"court for resolution.","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"Enter Appellees, a group of 35,651 Illinois consumers, who","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"filed arbitration demands before the AAA alleging that they","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"purchased Samsung devices and that those devices","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"4 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"unlawfully collected and stored sensitive biometric data in vi-","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"olation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"ILCS 14/1 et seq. Skeptical of the consumers’ litigation tactics","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"and the veracity of their claims, Samsung flagged several","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"problems with the consumers’ filings to the AAA, such as","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"missing or inaccurate contact information and misspelled ad-","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"dresses. The AAA agreed that the filings were deficient and","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"requested that the consumers submit revised versions. When","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"the consumers complied, the AAA notified the parties that the","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"consumers had met the AAA’s filing requirements. Then, the","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"AAA requested $4,125,000 from Samsung, representing Sam-","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"sung’s share of the initial administrative filing fees (the con-","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"sumers had already paid their share).","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"Samsung, still doubting the merits of the claims, refused","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"to pay its share of the filing fees. In response, and in accord-","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"ance with the rules discussed above, the AAA offered the con-","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"sumers the opportunity to advance Samsung’s fees so that the","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"arbitration could proceed, but they declined. The AAA then","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"notified the parties that, unless it heard otherwise, it would","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"close the arbitration proceedings and refund the consumers’","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"filing fees, allowing either party to submit the dispute to the","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"appropriate court for resolution. The consumers responded,","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"reiterating that they would not advance the fees and asking","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"the AAA to stay the proceedings until they could get an order","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"compelling arbitration from a federal court. The AAA denied","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"the request for a stay and closed the arbitration proceedings.","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"Rather than submit their cases to federal court on the mer-","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"its, the consumers filed a Petition to Compel Arbitration un-","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"der § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act. 9 U.S.C. § 4. Aside from","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"attorneys’ fees and costs, the only relief sought in the petition","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"was an order compelling Samsung to pay its AAA filing fees","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 5","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"and to arbitrate the claims. The district court, relying on cop-","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"ies of the consumers’ arbitration demands before the AAA,","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"copies of Samsung’s terms and conditions, a spreadsheet con-","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"taining the consumers’ names and addresses, and the AAA’s","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"determination that the consumers had met the AAA filing re-","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"quirements, found that the consumers sufficiently established","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. Then, the court","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"ordered Samsung to pay its administrative filing fees and pro-","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"ceed to arbitration. It issued a separate minute entry indicat-","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"ing that it granted the consumers’ petition and staying the","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"case pending the arbitration. This appeal followed.","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"II","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"Before turning to the merits of the appeal, we must ad-","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"dress two jurisdictional hurdles. First, we agree with the par-","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"ties that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"the case. Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act, which im-","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"plements the Convention on the Recognition and Enforce-","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"ment of Foreign Arbitral Awards, confers subject matter juris-","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"diction upon district courts for actions or proceedings falling","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"under the Convention, regardless of the amount in contro-","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"versy. 9 U.S.C. § 203. And an action to enforce an arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"agreement falls under the Convention if the agreement","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"(1) arises out of a commercial relationship (2) that is not en-","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"tirely between citizens of the United States. Id. § 202; see also","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 59 n.9 (2009) (citing Chap-","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"ter 2 of the FAA as an example of Congress expanding federal","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"subject matter jurisdiction). Here, the alleged arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"agreements at issue indisputably arose out of a commercial","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"relationship—the consumers purchased electronic goods","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"from Samsung. And at least one of the parties, Samsung Elec-","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"tronics Co., Ltd., is not a citizen of the United States.","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"6 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"Therefore, under § 203 of the FAA, the district court had sub-","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"ject matter jurisdiction over the consumers’ action seeking to","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"enforce the agreements.","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"We next turn to appellate jurisdiction. The consumers","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"argue that we do not have appellate jurisdiction over","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"Samsung’s appeal. We disagree. The consumers proceeded in","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"the district court under § 4 of the FAA by petitioning “for an","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"order directing that … arbitration proceed in the manner","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"provided for” in “a written agreement for arbitration.” 9","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"U.S.C. § 4. The district court granted the petition and ordered","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"Samsung to arbitrate, then inexplicably stayed the case.","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"Section 16 of the FAA, 9 U.S.C. § 16, governs appellate review","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"of arbitration orders. Pertinent to this appeal are two","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"subsections: § 16(a)(3) and § 16(b)(1). Section 16(a)(3) states,","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"“An appeal may be taken from … a final decision with respect","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"to an arbitration that is subject to this title.” But § 16(b)(1)","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"limits appellate review in certain circumstances, stating,","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"“[A]n appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order …","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"granting a stay of any action under section 3 of this title.” The","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"consumers believe § 16(b)(1) precludes our appellate review","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"because the district court stayed the case after compelling","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"Samsung to arbitrate. In further support, they chiefly rely on","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"a footnote from the Supreme Court’s decision in Green Tree","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph, 531 U.S. 79 (2000). The","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"consumers’ argument is flawed. Section 16(b)(1) and Green","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"Tree do not apply here.","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"Section 16(b)(1) only limits appellate review of an “inter-","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"locutory order” granting a stay “under section 3.” And a § 3","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"stay only occurs in proceedings brought “upon any issue ref-","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"erable to arbitration” after one of the parties asks the court for","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"the stay. Such proceedings are distinguishable from those","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 7","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"brought under § 4 (like the proceedings here) in that they in-","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"volve underlying substantive claims for relief that are them-","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"selves, in whole or in part, referable to arbitration and distinct","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"from mere requests to compel arbitration. See Gilmer v. Inter-","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"state/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 25 (1991) (“The FAA also","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"provides for stays of proceedings in federal district courts","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"when an issue in the proceeding is referable to arbitration, § 3,","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"and for orders compelling arbitration when one party has","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"failed, neglected, or refused to comply with an arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"agreement, § 4.”); see, e.g., GEA Grp. AG v. Flex-N-Gate Corp.,","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"740 F.3d 411, 413–15 (7th Cir. 2014) (seeking a stay under § 3","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"where underlying fraud claims were referable to arbitration).","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"Thus, in a § 3 setting, a district court will have substantive","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"claims before it that are distinct from a request to arbitrate. If","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"the court finds that a valid arbitration agreement exists, it","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"must compel arbitration, stay the case, and retain jurisdiction","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"over those substantive claims until arbitration concludes. The","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"district court’s interlocutory order compelling arbitration in","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"that circumstance would not be appealable, squarely fitting","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"within the limitation set forth in § 16(b)(1). On the other hand,","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"in a § 4 setting, the only issue before the district court is a pe-","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"tition to compel arbitration; no underlying substantive claims","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"for relief are raised. Therefore, once the court issues its arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"tration order (leaving nothing else for it to do), it renders a","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"final decision that is appealable under § 16(a)(3); § 16(b)(1)","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"would not apply.","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"The Supreme Court’s reasoning in Green Tree tracks with","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"our interpretation of § 16(a)(3) and § 16(b)(1). In that case, Lar-","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"ketta Randolph had sued Green Tree Financial Corp. for vio-","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"lations of the Truth in Lending Act (TLA) and the Equal Credit","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"Opportunity Act (ECOA) based on a finance agreement","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"8 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"between the parties. 531 U.S. at 82–83. Green Tree filed a mo-","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"tion to compel arbitration based on provisions of the agree-","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"ment and sought a stay of the case, or, alternatively, a dismis-","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"sal. Id. at 83. The district court granted the motion to compel,","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"denied the request for a stay, and dismissed her TLA and","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"ECOA claims with prejudice. Id. Randolph appealed. Id. at 84.","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"The Supreme Court concluded that it had appellate jurisdic-","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"tion under § 16(a)(3) to review the order compelling arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"tion, holding that “where … the District Court has ordered","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"the parties to proceed to arbitration, and dismissed all the","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"claims before it, that decision is ‘final’ within the meaning of","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"§ 16(a)(3), and therefore appealable.” Id. at 89; see also id. at","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"86 (defining a “final decision” in § 16(a)(3) as “a decision that","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"‘ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing more for","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"the court to do but execute the judgment’”) (quotation omit-","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"ted).","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"In a footnote, however, the Court observed, “Had the Dis-","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"trict Court entered a stay instead of a dismissal in this case,","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"that order would not be appealable.” Id. at 87 n.2 (citing 9","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"U.S.C. § 16(b)(1)). The consumers latch onto this footnote,","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"reading it expansively to mean that any entry of a stay by a","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"district court renders an arbitration order unappealable. But","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"that view wholly ignores the context of the Court’s observa-","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"tion. A stay in Green Tree would have necessarily been under","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"§ 3 because Randolph brought substantive TLA and ECOA","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"claims—the issues referable to arbitration—before the district","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"court, not merely a petition to compel arbitration under § 4. If","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"it stayed the case, then, the court would have needed to retain","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"jurisdiction over those substantive claims, thereby precluding","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"appellate review. Thus, read correctly and in context, the","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"Court’s footnote in Green Tree merely confirms our discussion","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"above—that a stay entered under § 3 is an interlocutory order","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 9","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"precluded from immediate appellate review under § 16(b)(1).","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"Green Tree did not involve a § 4 proceeding, and nothing in","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"the Court’s reasoning or in the language of § 16(b)(1) supports","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"the consumers’ broad rule that any entry of a stay, even an","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"unnecessary one in a § 4 proceeding, precludes appellate re-","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"view.","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"Our sister circuits have reached this same conclusion. For","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"example, in United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufac-","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"turing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"Union v. Wise Alloys, LLC, 807 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2015), a dis-","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"trict court compelled arbitration and stayed the proceedings","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"even though the plaintiff had only sought an arbitration order","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"without bringing any substantive claims. Id. at 1264–65. The","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"court rejected the argument that the stay precluded appellate","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"review, noting (1) that the language in Green Tree read in con-","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"text only referred to stays entered as interlocutory orders in","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"§ 3 proceedings, (2) that the district court was not authorized","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"to enter a stay (especially under § 3), and (3) that the district","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"court’s order compelling arbitration resolved “the only claim","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"for relief advanced by any party to the action,” rendering the","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"order a final decision appealable under § 16(a)(3). Id. at 1268–","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"70; see also Int’l All. of Theatrical Stage Emp. & Moving Picture","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"Technicians, Artists, and Allied Crafts v. InSync Show Prods., Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"801 F.3d 1033, 1040 (9th Cir. 2015) (“When the only matter be-","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"fore a district court is a petition to compel arbitration and the","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"district court grants the petition, appellate jurisdiction may","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"attach regardless of whether the district court issues a stay.”);","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"Brown v. Pac. Life Ins. Co., 462 F.3d 384, 391–93 (5th Cir. 2006)","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"(rejecting the appellees’ argument that a stay in the case ren-","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"dered the order non-appealable because the stay was not is-","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"sued “pursuant to section 3” as required under § 16(b)(1)).","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"10 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"Our precedent likewise only reaffirms our appellate juris-","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"diction. For instance, the consumers argue that in INTL","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"FCStone Financial Inc. v. Jacobson, 950 F.3d 491 (7th Cir. 2020),","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"we barred a similar appeal in an action that only sought to","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"compel arbitration. That is not accurate. Unlike here, the","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"plaintiff in FCStone did not solely petition to compel arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"tion under § 4. See id. at 495 (noting that the plaintiff’s","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"amended complaint “added” a § 4 count). Rather, it filed suit","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"seeking a declaratory judgment that “FINRA is not a valid ar-","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"bitration forum for the parties’ dispute” and that “NFA is the","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"valid forum for this dispute.” Id. We contemplated whether","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"§ 16(a)(3) conferred appellate jurisdiction but determined that","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"it did not because “[t]he district court kept the lawsuit open","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"to address arbitration-related issues, including arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"venue and whether grounds existed to grant a permanent in-","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"junction.” Id. at 501. Thus, we could not conclude that “the","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"district court left ‘nothing more for the court to do but execute","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"the judgment,’ as needed to qualify the arbitration order as a","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"final decision.” Id. (quotation omitted); cf. Moglia v. Pac. Emps.","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"Ins. Co. of N.A., 547 F.3d 835, 836–37 (7th Cir. 2008) (finding","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"district court’s order compelling arbitration and staying pro-","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"ceedings involving unresolved bankruptcy claims to not be","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"appealable).","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"Finally, the consumers believe that the Supreme Court’s","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"recent decision in Smith v. Spizzirri, 144 S. Ct. 1173 (2024), sup-","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"ports their argument. Not so. Spizzirri merely held that a dis-","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"trict court must issue a stay (rather than dismiss a case) when","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"a party requests a stay under § 3. Id. at 1175. The Court there-","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"fore answered a question that had been explicitly left open in","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"Green Tree. See 531 U.S. at 87 n.2 (“The question whether the","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"District Court should have [stayed rather than dismissed the","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"case] is not before us, and we do not address it.”). Spizzirri’s","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 11","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"holding adheres to our § 3 analysis above and did not address","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"§ 4. It does not apply.","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"Because the consumers proceeded in the district court un-","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"der § 4 and merely sought an order compelling arbitration,","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"the limitation on appellate review found in § 16(b)(1) is inap-","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"posite. The district court did not have the authority to enter a","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"stay, and whatever stay it did enter was certainly not one au-","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"thorized under § 3—no party sought a stay, and the case did","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"not involve an issue referable to arbitration. Rather, after the","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"district court compelled arbitration, it resolved the action’s","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"only claim for relief. As in Green Tree, we conclude that the","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"district court’s decision ended the litigation on the merits and","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"left “nothing more for [it] to do but execute the judgment.”","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"531 U.S. at 86. It therefore issued an appealable final decision","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"under § 16(a)(3).","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"III","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"We next turn to the merits. A party seeking to compel ar-","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"bitration under the FAA must show three elements: (1) an en-","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"forceable written agreement to arbitrate; (2) a dispute within","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"the scope of the arbitration agreement; and (3) a refusal to ar-","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"bitrate. A.D. v. Credit One Bank, N.A., 885 F.3d 1054, 1060 (7th","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"Cir. 2018). Samsung disputes the first and third elements.","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"First, it argues that the consumers failed to present evidence","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"of an arbitration agreement and that the district court’s find-","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"ing of an enforceable agreement wrongly shifted the eviden-","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"tiary burden to Samsung. Second, Samsung asserts that it did","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"not refuse to arbitrate by not paying the initial AAA filing","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"fees. Instead, in its view, the arbitration proceeded according","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"to the alleged agreement’s terms, and the district court ex-","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"ceeded its authority when it ordered Samsung to pay the fees.","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"We address each argument in turn.","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"12 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"A","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"While the FAA does not provide the evidentiary standard","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"applicable for determining whether to compel arbitration, we","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"(as well as our sister circuits) have analogized the standard","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"needed to that required at summary judgment. A district","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"court may conclude as a matter of law that parties did or did","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"not enter into an arbitration agreement only if no genuine dis-","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"pute of material fact exists as to the formation of the agree-","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"ment. See Tinder v. Pinkerton Sec., 305 F.3d 728, 735 (7th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"2002); Bazemore v. Jefferson Cap. Sys., LLC, 827 F.3d 1325, 1333","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"(11th Cir. 2016); Bensadoun v. Jobe-Riat, 316 F.3d 171, 175 (2d","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"Cir. 2003). The party seeking to compel arbitration bears the","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"initial burden to show that an arbitration agreement exists.","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"See A.D., 889 F.3d at 1063 (“However, as the party seeking to","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"compel arbitration, Credit One had the burden of showing","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"that A.D. was bound by the cardholder agreement as an au-","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"thorized user.”); see also In re StockX Customer Data Sec. Breach","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"Litig., 19 F.4th 873, 881 (6th Cir. 2021) (“To determine whether","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"the existence of an [arbitration] agreement is ‘in issue,’ this","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"court applies the standard for summary judgment. … [T]he","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"movant asserting the existence of a contract[] must initially","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"carry its burden to produce evidence that would allow a rea-","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"sonable jury to find that a contract exists.”).","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"In this case, as the parties seeking to compel arbitration,","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"the consumers bore the burden of producing a valid arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"tion agreement with Samsung. But because Samsung con-","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"ceded that an individual agrees to arbitrate all disputes when","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"he or she purchases or uses a Samsung device, the consumers","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"effectively only needed to present evidence that they were in","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"fact Samsung customers. (Individuals who, for instance, pur-","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"chase or use the Samsung device of another without resetting","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 13","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"that device or without creating a unique user account might","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"not have notice of or be subject to Samsung’s terms. But the","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"parties proceed as if the consumers do not fall into this nar-","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"row category, so we do the same.) To support their petition to","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"compel arbitration, the consumers relied on the following:","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"(1) copies of their arbitration demands made before the AAA;","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"(2) a spreadsheet containing their names and addresses;","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"(3) copies of Samsung’s terms and conditions; and (4) the","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"AAA’s determination that the consumers had met the AAA","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"filing requirements. That was not enough.","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"First, the arbitration demands are nothing more than alle-","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"gations, much like a complaint filed in a district court. For ex-","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"ample, one representative demand stated, “Paula Wallrich …","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"is a natural person who owns a Samsung Galaxy device.” But","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"like a complaint, the demand is only signed by counsel. No","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"claimant submitted any declaration or otherwise attested un-","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"der the penalty of perjury to the facts alleged in the arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"demands. “[A] plaintiff must do more than simply point to","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"the allegations in his complaint,” or in this case, the allega-","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"tions in an arbitration demand, to defeat summary judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"Est. of Perry v. Wenzel, 872 F.3d 439, 461 (7th Cir. 2017).","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"The copies of Samsung’s terms and conditions and the","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"spreadsheet containing the consumers’ names and addresses","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"are also insufficient. Again, Samsung does not dispute that its","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"terms and conditions bind its customers to arbitration agree-","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"ments. The terms and conditions the consumers identify are","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"simply copies found in any Samsung device or on Samsung’s","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"website, not terms and conditions reviewed and received by","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"specific consumers. Without more, those copies do nothing to","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"show that any of the consumers purchased a Samsung device.","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"And a spreadsheet of only names and addresses likewise fails","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"14 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"to show that any of those named were Samsung customers.","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"Identifying a generic arbitration agreement and then inde-","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"pendently listing the names and addresses of alleged consum-","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"ers without doing anything to link those consumers to the","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"agreement does not satisfy the “existence of an arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"agreement” element—like any agreement, the element re-","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"quires a showing of assent between the relevant parties. See","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"A.D., 885 F.3d at 1062–63 (acknowledging undisputed arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"tion agreement between Credit One Bank and a mother but","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"noting that Credit One had the burden of independently","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"showing “that A.D. was bound by the cardholder agree-","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"ment”).","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"Finally, the AAA’s determination that the consumers had","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"met the filing requirements under the AAA rules also does","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"not serve as evidence of an arbitration agreement between the","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"consumers and Samsung. The AAA’s filing requirements in-","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"volve no substantive determinations. Rather, a claimant only","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"needs to explain the dispute, list the names and addresses of","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"the consumers, specify the amount in dispute, identify a loca-","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"tion for the hearing, state the relief sought, and attach a copy","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"of the alleged arbitration agreement. Once those boxes are","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"checked, the AAA concludes that filing requirements have","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"been met. At no point in this initial process does the AAA de-","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"termine whether the claimants entered into an arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"agreement with the business or even whether the claimants","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"were customers of the business. Cf. Bigger v. Facebook, Inc., 947","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"F.3d 1043, 1048, 1050–51 (7th Cir. 2020) (reversing a district","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"court’s finding of valid arbitration agreements based only on","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"templates of agreements rather than specific agreements with","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"employees). Thus, the AAA’s filing determination adds noth-","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"ing to support the consumers’ bare allegations that they","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 15","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"purchased Samsung devices or otherwise entered into arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"tration agreements with Samsung.","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"The consumers could have submitted almost anything to","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"meet their burden of proving the existence of an arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"agreement. For example, they could have submitted receipts,","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"order numbers, or confirmation numbers from their pur-","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"chases of Samsung devices. Or even more directly, they could","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"have submitted declarations attesting to the allegations in","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"their arbitration demands. They did not. Without adducing","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"any evidence aside from their allegations, the consumers","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"failed to meet their initial burden of proving the existence of","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"a valid arbitration agreement with Samsung.","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"The consumers alternatively argue that we should remand","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"the case to allow them to present additional evidence. But the","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"summary judgment stage, which our posture is akin to, does","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"not allow second chances. See Weaver v. Champion Petfoods","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"USA Inc., 3 F.4th 927, 938 (7th Cir. 2021) (“Summary judgment","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"is the proverbial put up or shut up moment in a lawsuit … .”)","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"(quotation omitted); see also Bazemore, 827 F.3d at 1333 (“[De-","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"fendant] would have us hold, essentially, that a party cannot","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"lose a motion to compel arbitration for failure to prove that an","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"arbitration agreement exists without being afforded a second","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"bite at the apple—an opportunity to prove the agreement’s","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"existence at trial. This we decline to do.”). The consumers had","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"the opportunity to present their evidence, and they failed to","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"do so.","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"B","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"Even if the consumers had met their evidentiary burden,","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"the district court exceeded its authority and the scope of the","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"arbitration agreement by ordering Samsung to pay the AAA","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"16 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"filing fees. As discussed above, “[a] party aggrieved by the al-","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"leged failure, neglect, or refusal of another to arbitrate under","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"a written agreement for arbitration may petition any United","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"States district court … for an order directing that such arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"tion proceed in the manner provided for in such agreement.”","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"9 U.S.C. § 4. Here, Samsung and the consumers proceeded","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"through arbitration in the manner provided for in their agree-","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"ment. That is all that was required.","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"The Supreme Court “has consistently held that parties","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"may delegate threshold arbitrability questions to the arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"tor, so long as the parties’ agreement does so by ‘clear and","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"unmistakable’ evidence.” Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. 63, 69 (2019). Thus, “if a valid agreement","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"exists, and if the agreement delegates the arbitrability issue to","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"an arbitrator, a court may not decide the arbitrability issue.”","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"Id.; see also Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U.S. 176, 184 (2019)","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"(“Parties may generally shape such agreements to their liking","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"by specifying with whom they will arbitrate, the issues sub-","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"ject to arbitration, the rules by which they will arbitrate, and","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"the arbitrators who will resolve their disputes.”). Addition-","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"ally, procedural issues, like fee disputes, are “presumptively","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"not for the judge, but for an arbitrator, to decide.” See Howsam","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 84 (2002) (emphasis","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"in original).","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"The arbitration agreement allegedly entered into between","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"Samsung and the consumers delegated threshold arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"fee disputes to the AAA. The parties thus bargained for the","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"AAA’s discretion over the payment of administrative filing","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"fees, including the consequences that would stem from a","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"party’s refusal to pay those fees. After Samsung refused to","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"pay its fees, the AAA, in line with its rules (which it applies in","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 17","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"its discretion), allowed the consumers to advance Samsung’s","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"fees. If the consumers had advanced the fees, Samsung would","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"have arbitrated the merits of the consumers’ claims. However,","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"the consumers declined. The AAA then could have stayed the","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"arbitration, as requested by the consumers, but it chose not to.","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"Instead, it terminated the proceedings, opening the door for","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"the consumers to pursue their claims in district court. Rather","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"than take this route, the consumers sought an order compel-","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"ling Samsung to arbitrate and to pay the required fees. But","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"this request was outside the district court’s authority. Sam-","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"sung and the consumers’ arbitration proceeded in line with","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"their agreement. The AAA considered the dispute and termi-","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"nated the arbitration within its discretion. At that point, arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"tration was complete, and the district court did not have the","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"authority to flout the parties’ agreement and disturb the","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"AAA’s judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"Other circuits agree with our position. In Dealer Computer","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"Services, Inc. v. Old Colony Motors, Inc., 588 F.3d 884 (5th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"2009), for example, Dealer Services and Old Colony agreed to","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"arbitrate under AAA rules. Id. at 886. Dealer Services paid its","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"share of arbitration fees, but Old Colony did not, citing a lack","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"of assets. Id. Dealer Services therefore brought a § 4 petition","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"to compel Old Colony to arbitrate and pay the required fees,","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"which the district court granted. Id. The Fifth Circuit reversed,","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"concluding that the district court could not compel Old Col-","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"ony to arbitrate and pay the AAA fees because administrative","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"filing fees (which the parties had agreed would be resolved","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"per AAA rules) are “conditions precedent to arbitration” and","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"“are procedural issues left to the discretion of the arbitrators.”","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"Id. at 888.","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"18 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"Similarly, in Lifescan, Inc. v. Premier Diabetic Services, Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"363 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2004), the parties agreed to resolve their","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"disputes, including disputes related to the payment of fees,","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"based on AAA rules. Id. at 1011–12. After Premier did not pay","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"its share of filing fees, the AAA suspended the arbitration pro-","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"ceedings, and Lifescan filed a petition to compel Premier to","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"arbitrate and pay the fees—the district court granted the peti-","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"tion. Id. at 1011. Like the Fifth Circuit, the Ninth Circuit re-","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"versed. The court rejected Lifescan’s argument that arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"tion does not “begin” until the parties deposit their fees. Id. at","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"1012. Rather, the court noted the substantial discretion given","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"to arbitrators under AAA rules in how to handle the proce-","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"dure and payment of fees. Id. 1012–13 (“The arbitrators exer-","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"cised their discretion in this case by allowing the arbitration","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"to proceed on the condition that Lifescan advance the remain-","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"ing fees. This may not be an ideal solution to the problem of a","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"party’s failure to pay its share of the fees, but it is well within","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"the discretion of the arbitrators.”). It therefore concluded that","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"the arbitration “proceeded pursuant to the parties’ agreement","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"and the rules they incorporated.” Id. at 1013.","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"The consumers note that Dealer Computer Services and","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"Lifescan involved parties who did not have the means to pay","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"their fees. They urge us to draw a line between those types of","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"parties and parties like Samsung, who simply choose not to","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"pay their fees despite having the funds. In the consumers’","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"view, such action is an outright neglect and refusal to arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"trate, and allowing a company like Samsung to avoid arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"tion in this way would render the arbitration process and the","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"FAA without force. No doubt, some courts have pondered","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"drawing this line between indigent and non-indigent parties.","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"See, e.g., Tillman v. Tillman, 825 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir. 2016)","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"(“Our decision that Tillman’s case may proceed does not","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"No. 23-2842 19","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"mean that parties may refuse to arbitrate by choosing not to","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"pay for arbitration. If Tillman had refused to pay for arbitra-","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"tion despite having the capacity to do so, the district court","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"probably could still have sought to compel arbitration … .”)","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"(emphasis in original). But we see no reason to make that dis-","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"tinction.","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"The Federal Arbitration Act does not grant the consumers","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"an unfettered right to arbitrate, and nothing in the statute","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"treats parties differently based on financial status. Rather, all","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"the law requires is that the parties arbitrate according to the","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"terms of their agreement. The agreement here delegated fee","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"issues to the procedures and rules of the AAA. And the AAA,","paragraph_id":"para_584"},{"text":"using those rules, denied a stay, terminated the arbitration,","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"and sent the claims to federal court after Samsung refused to","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"pay its fees. The parties therefore fully “arbitrated” under","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"their agreement. See Noble Cap. Fund Mgmt., LLC v. US Cap.","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"Glob. Inv. Mgmt., LLC, 31 F.4th 333, 336 (5th Cir. 2022) (“Here","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"the parties’ arbitration agreements called for arbitration pur-","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"suant to JAMS [Rules], which included the right of JAMS to","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"terminate the arbitration proceedings for nonpayment of fees","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"by any party. Exercising this right, JAMS terminated the arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"tration proceeding following the Fund’s nonpayment. Fol-","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"lowing the lead of our sister circuits, we conclude that arbi-","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"tration ‘has been had.’”). Thus, even in a case like this one,","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"where an arbitration proceeding ends before reaching the","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"merits, “the parties still exercised their contractual right to ar-","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"bitrate prior to judicial resolution in accordance with the","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"terms of their agreements.” Id.; see also Pre-Paid Legal Servs.,","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"Inc. v. Cahill, 786 F.3d 1287, 1294 (10th Cir. 2015) (concluding","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"that the arbitration “had been had” in accordance with the ar-","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"bitration agreement when the AAA terminated the proceed-","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"ings following Cahill’s refusal to pay fees).","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"20 No. 23-2842","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"In sum, even assuming an arbitration agreement between","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"the consumers and Samsung, the consumers cannot compel","paragraph_id":"para_607"},{"text":"Samsung to pay the AAA’s administrative fees. The parties","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"agreed to abide by the rules and procedures of the AAA, and","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"they proceeded through arbitration in accordance with those","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"rules and their consequences. If the AAA believed Samsung","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"was abusing the arbitration process, it could have stayed the","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"case or threatened to decline administering future consumer","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"arbitrations with Samsung, but it did not. Instead, the AAA","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"terminated the proceedings and invited the parties to resolve","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"their claims in district court. At that point, Samsung and the","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"consumers’ arbitration was complete. The consumers may","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"view this result as unjust, but we are here because they in-","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"voked their alleged agreement with Samsung; they cannot","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"now complain of that agreement’s terms. Further, the con-","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"sumers were not left without recourse. They could have ad-","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"vanced Samsung’s fees and continued with arbitration, or","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"they can now pursue their claims on the merits in district","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"court.","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"REVERSED","paragraph_id":"para_625"}],"word_count":5740,"cites":["556 U.S. 49","531 U.S. 79","500 U.S. 20","586 U.S. 63","587 U.S. 176","537 U.S. 79","740 F.3d 411","807 F.3d 1258","801 F.3d 1033","462 F.3d 384","950 F.3d 491","547 F.3d 835","885 F.3d 1054","305 F.3d 728","827 F.3d 1325","316 F.3d 171","19 F.4th 873","872 F.3d 439","947\nF.3d 1043","3 F.4th 927","588 F.3d 884","363 F.3d 1010","825 F.3d 1069","31 F.4th 333","786 F.3d 1287"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"b58b89405e7ba4a6b31055b22ca525c60351162ad59218ac416fbcb9df90a2d2","source_url":"https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/OpinionsWeb/processWebInputExternal.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2024/D07-01/C:23-2842:J:Kirsch:aut:T:fnOp:N:3230291:S:0","fetched_at":"2026-10-02T05:52:52.449+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/106-f-4th-609","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:106-f-4th-609","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:106-f-4th-609","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:106-f-4th-609","verification":{"stored_sha256":"b58b89405e7ba4a6b31055b22ca525c60351162ad59218ac416fbcb9df90a2d2","recomputed_sha256":"b58b89405e7ba4a6b31055b22ca525c60351162ad59218ac416fbcb9df90a2d2","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-14T13:20:44.435Z"}},"hash":"sha256:357f1928de211af477ffec178629b93bdc6bee0994424487a27df14d747b9206","version":"legal-2026-10-14","expires":"2026-10-15T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-14+legal-2026-10-14+2026-10-14T12:52:48","content_hash":"sha256:357f1928de211af477ffec178629b93bdc6bee0994424487a27df14d747b9206","revalidate_after":"2026-10-14T14:20:44.609Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:106-f-4th-609","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:106-f-4th-609"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:106-f-4th-609"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:106-f-4th-609"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/106-f-4th-609","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-f7b54af988d7debe98c18ee0f885a38f","response_hash":"sha256:357f1928de211af477ffec178629b93bdc6bee0994424487a27df14d747b9206"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:36:21.597Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3A106-f-4th-609&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":27959}}